Yes, but there are so many churches, castles, historical monuments that even those on the priority list for repairs aren’t sufficiently funded.
And there isn’t a tradition of donations, foundations, etc. The Notre Dame foundation was created by and is managed by Americans. I’m hoping this will create a “donor class” concept 
in France - look at me, I’m so rich I can give to more than one big project and smaller ones! 
There was a “National heritage lottery” last year for smaller projects since so much is falling apart. It was funded by €15 tickets. (Look up Stéphane Bern Loto du patrimoine to know more. There’s also a Loto Bern which is not the same thing, but rather a sort of drinking game invented by history teachers since Bern’s TV programs follow a pattern “Stephane reveals some sex scandal”, “Stephane dresses up as a king/prince”, etc.)
Notre Dame had been under repairs. That’s why some thought one of the master Craftsmen working there were to blame, or perhaps some of their materials (Short circuit, etc). That’s also why some of the statues were saved - they’d been sent to a specialist workshop in Dordogne the Friday before.
I think people sometimes have a knee-jerk reaction and think the billionaires are giving to a building and that’s the end of that. The rebuilding & restoration will employ many people and have a positive ripple effect in their economy. The fire was very sad, but they have no choice now but to rebuild and turn that into a positive for employment and tourism.
Notre Dame was under repair and surrounded by scaffolding when we visited it in the mid 1990s. It seems it’s been under repair and renovation for a very long time.
@Himom, we must have visited about the same time. It was under repair when we went there, too. My D was in the kindergarten and they didn’t let anyone in. Interestingly, they had a sandbox for kids right next to the cathedral.
We were able to visit and tour it, but it was limited and hard to envision what it would look like without the scaffolding. Sainte-Chapelle, on the other hand didn’t have any scaffolding and was very lovely. Notre Dame was beautiful but the scaffolding was definitely a detraction and many of the photos I’ve seen of it since have had the scaffolding, so I’m guessing there has been a lot of scaffolding around it for a very long time.
I saw a program on the 1992 fire which destroyed one-fifth of Windsor Castle. Because the walls were soaked with water, the restoration had to go all the way back to the original stone, three stories deep. The work was done in 5 years. Maybe Notre Dame can be done in 5 also.
?Not sure if it was established before:
"Notre Dame and all of its pre-1905 artworks are the property of the French state and not insured. "
https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/notre-dame-fire-raises-questions-about-insuring-historical-monuments-1.4387028
For Americans it is odd that a government would own a functioning Catholic church.
Yellow Best protestors in Oaris dstrying property. So why is it protestors feel it’s ok to set fires and throw rocks at people. That is counterproductive in my world and does nothing to change my mind to their point of view. Destruction of property is no way to draw attention for donations to your cause over donations to rebuilding Notre Dane Cathedral.
Obviously I didn’t proof very well. But you get the point.
Seems like an artifact of pre-1905 France governments building religious buildings (among other things in support of some religions) and retaining ownership of them (but allowing free use for religious services) after the 1905 law separating religion and government.
Notre Dame is a church. But it also is a VERY popular tourist destination, for historical and architectural reasons. So in some ways it still makes sense that it is government owned.
In Boston we have the iconic Old North Church, a very popular tourist attraction AND a functioning Episcopal church. They walk a tightrope between tourism and worship by the congregation.